Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, Social, And Physiological Determinants Of
Emotional State. Psychological Review, 69(5).
Arhe Vaninetti
Research Methods & Statistics, PSY301, Pacific University, Oregon
March 16, 2023
Cognitive, Social, And Physiological Determinants Of Emotional State
Within Schachter & Singer’s (1962) study on the stages of emotion, they aimed to find that emotions are the result of physiological factors (neurological and bodily emotions), and cognitive interpretation of those physiological factors. The findings of this study supported the Two-Factor Theory of Emotion. Namely, the researchers hoped to establish that emotion is not a simultaneous event, but rather two distant bodily functions that happen in tandem (and may or may not match each other).
The researchers used 184 male college students participants, who received credit for participation in the study. The study did not mention the ethnicity of the participants, or why male participants were chosen. The researchers created four conditions that involved epinephrine: Epinephrine informed, Epinephrine ignorant, Epinephrine misinformed, and a Placebo that the participants believed was epinephrine. With these four categories, the participants were then placed into two emotion conditions: Euphoria and Anger. This made a total of 7 experimental conditions, as the researchers did not have an Epinephrine misinformed x Anger condition. Before the researchers administered any injection to the participants, they accessed the school’s Student Health Service to ensure that the participants would not have any harmful side effects. After the participants were cleared, the researchers created each condition. The Epinephrine informed condition allowed the researchers to inform the participants of the full effects of the injection. The Epinephrine ignorant condition participants were only told that the injection was harmless and would have no side effects. The Epinephrine misinformed condition participants were told that the injection would result in itching, numbness, and a slight headache. For the emotion condition, the participants in the Euphoria condition were paired with a confederate in messy room, where, after they both received the injection, the confederate began to playfully toy with objects in the room, all while saying things that kept the condition happy. Inversely, in the other condition, Anger, the confederate and the participant were tasked with completing a questionnaire that had highly personal and slightly insulting questions, including, “With how many men (other than your father) has your mother had extramarital relationships?” The confederate in the Anger condition kept pace with the participant, and would exclaim various things in anger.
With either emotional condition, the participant had to finish another questionnaire after the condition ended (which lasted a total of 20 minutes), which consisted of a self-report of mood and physical condition. The researchers then explained that the experiment was over, and explained the deception used and the purpose of the study.
Within the results section, the researchers ensured that the epinephrine conditions did have physical effects on the participants, noting that the epinephrine conditions increased heart rate and physiological states in the body when compared to the placebo condition. The researchers did note, however, that some participants did not react to the epinephrine injections. Next, once the participants’ emotional condition, Euphoria or Anger, was analyzed, the researchers noticed that the participants in the Euphoria condition did report feeling more positive emotions—no matter which chemical condition that they were in. Similarly, the same happened with the Anger condition, as the participants reported more negative emotions. The researchers did also notice, however, that the Epinephrine ignorant condition participants were more likely to adopt the mood of the confederate in either emotional condition.
These results went on to inform the Two-Factor Theory of Emotion, wherein the participant’s interpretation of their physiological reaction created their state of emotions (dependent on the confederate’s ruse). One way that this research could be improved would be with the inclusion of cultural considerations towards group emotional reactivity, as some cultures may have different attitudes around others’ becoming impatient in the Anger condition or creating a mess in the Euphoric state. Finally, the exclusion of women from this study gave it less power and made it much less generalizable to the overall population.